If you answered "YES" To the above question,  then Please consider the case  of Christopher Thrasher.                                                                                   

Christopher was a child having no financial means, who 16 years ago was locked up at the age of 16 for his alleged involvement in the murder of 2 juveniles.  ALL AGREED he did not participate in the murders.  Yet he was convicted by complicity to the murders despite a complete lack of "hard evidence" and was sentenced to the hopeless condition of LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, in a maximum security prison.

The jury system-----to be tried by an impartial group of your peers----is one of the foundations of the American system of justice and of all systems of justice based on common law. But this system is not flawless and sometimes it fails and leads to wrongful convictions. A significant number of such cases have been widely publicized during the last FIFTEEN years in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Some cases of wrongful conviction have been overturned because of DNA evidence but even more have been overturned because of recognized flaws in the judicial process. Conviction by a jury doesnt guarantee that justice is done. In some cases it has the effect of perpetuating injustice.
One of the most common flaws in the judicial process often results from excessive press coverage and emotional hype in the geographical area where the case is tried. This has the effect of prejudicing the outcome regardless of the merits of the case presented by the defense. The trial of Christopher Thrasher has all the hallmarks of one of these cases for a number of reasons. Individually, these items would not probably be a serious problem, but collectively, they call into serious question whether it was possible for Christopher Thrasher to receive a fair and impartial trial.

•         The publicity was so widespread of Christophers involvement that the jury having been polled individually admitted 54 out of 60 had information about the case.  Some had extensive information.  One juror on the record stated "there was so much on the radio and TV about the case it was nerve racking".  Yet the Motion for Change of Venue was denied.
•         Due to the lack of financial means of Christophers mother, they could not afford counsel and had to rely on a court appointed attorney who had no previous experience in trying a capital case.  It has also been brought to light that one of his counsel was under the influence of drugs during his trial.  Was this a violation of his 6^th Amendment right which guarantees effective assistance of counsel?  Even after the urging of the family to call certain witnesses in Christophers defense, these requests were refused.
•         The trial of one of the principal defendants, Carvin Stargell (who was accused of actually committing the murders) took place 5 months prior to Christophers trial.  During his trial, the press was full of negative stories about Christopher Thrasher, often depicting him as a young thug and gang leader.
•         The other principal defendant, Nathan Gast, was given a sentence of 3 life sentences to run concurrent and sent to a minimum security prison.  This was arranged due to his timely appearance at the police station with a lawyer and making a deal before the others were arrested.  He didnt spend a night in jail until his sentencing.  Nathan Gast was actually present and guilty of participating in the murders with Carvin Stargell.
•         The District Attorney misrepresented the fact to the Judge that he would enter the above defendant, Nathan Gast, testimony in the trial to prove they were all in the same gang, thus getting the evidence of "gang" allowed into the record.  He knew he would not call this defendant because (a) He later states on the record that testimony acquired the week before the trial from Nathan could be exculpatory and didnt know if he would call him.  He had changed his previous statement and said that Christopher did not tell them to kill the boys but to "take them home", thus would nullify his theory of an order to kill (b) The statement that Nathan gave in the beginning stated he was not in a gang.  So, how could they all be in the same gang, with Christopher directing their actions.  Their entire case against Christopher revolved around gang testimony being allowed to prove their allegation that he was in charge and ordered the murders of the 2 juveniles.
•         At the time the murders were committed, Christopher was passed out drunk (over 15 miles away) with the States primary witness.  She collaborated this fact and there was never any doubt that he was not present.
•         The Juvenile Judges order stated that the only reason for transfer to adult status was the seriousness of the offense.  There was no evidence of extensive record, no record of past treatment efforts, no evidence of mental maturity, no evidence that the community would be better served by transferring him to adult status.  The only legitimate charge against Christopher as a juvenile was truancy. 

The State did not prove their case against Christopher Thrasher.  He is not guilty of Capital Murder and was found guilty by a jury that was tired of all the gang violence of the time.  The prosecutor knew that this testimony would inflame the jury and bias them.
 Given all these facts, isnt it legitimate to ask: How was this young man with no financial means supposed to get a fair trial in this town? One indication of this is the fact that the jury took only 90 minutes including their lunch break, to reach a decision that would decide Christophers fate for the rest of his natural life.

Putting aside the facts of his innocence, he was only 16 years old when this crime occurred.